95-17716. Utah Regulatory Program and Utah Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR) Plan  

  • [Federal Register Volume 60, Number 138 (Wednesday, July 19, 1995)]
    [Rules and Regulations]
    [Pages 37002-37012]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 95-17716]
    
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
    30 CFR Part 944
    
    
    Utah Regulatory Program and Utah Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation 
    (AMLR) Plan
    
    AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM), 
    Interior.
    
    ACTION: Final rule; approval of amendment.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: OSM is approving, with additional requirements, a proposed 
    amendment to the Utah regulatory program and Utah AMLR plan 
    (hereinafter referred to as the ``Utah program'' and the ``Utah plan'') 
    under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA). 
    The amendment consists of proposed revisions to the Utah Coal Mining 
    and Reclamation Act of 1979. The revisions to the Utah program concern 
    definitions of new terms; rulemaking authority and procedures; 
    administrative procedures; Division of Oil, Gas and Mining (Division) 
    action on permit applications; informal conferences; appeals and 
    further review; release of performance bonds; revegetation standards on 
    lands eligible for remining; operator requirements for underground coal 
    mining; contest of violation or amount of penalty; violations of Utah's 
    program or permit conditions; judicial review of rules and orders; 
    repeal of specific sections of the Utah Code Annotated 1953; and repeal 
    dates of certain provisions of the Utah program. The revisions to the 
    Utah plan concern lands and water eligible for reclamation, recovery of 
    reclamation costs, and liens against reclaimed lands. The amendment is 
    intended to revise the Utah program to be consistent with the 
    
    [[Page 37003]]
    Utah Administrative Procedures Act, and to revise the Utah program and 
    Utah plan to be consistent with SMCRA, and improve operational 
    efficiency.
    
    EFFECTIVE DATE: July 19, 1995.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    James F. Fulton, Chief, Denver Field Division, Western Regional 
    Coordinating Center, Telephone: (303) 672-5524.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    
    I. Background on the Utah Program and the Utah Plan
    
        On January 21, 1981, and June 3, 1983, the Secretary of the 
    Interior conditionally approved the Utah program and approved the Utah 
    plan. General background information on the Utah program and Utah plan, 
    including the Secretary's findings, the disposition of comments, the 
    conditions of approval of the Utah program, and approval of the Utah 
    plan, can be found in the January 21, 1981, and June 3, 1983, 
    publications of the Federal Register (46 FR 5899 and 48 FR 24876). 
    Subsequent actions concerning Utah's program and program amendments can 
    be found at 30 CFR 944.15, 944.16, and 944.30. Subsequent actions 
    concerning Utah's plan amendments can be found at 30 CFR 944.25.
    
    II. Proposed Amendment
    
        By letter dated April 14, 1994, Utah submitted a proposed amendment 
    to its program and plan pursuant to SMCRA (administrative record No. 
    UT-917). The amendment consists of proposed revisions to the Utah Coal 
    Mining and Reclamation Act of 1979. Utah submitted the proposed 
    amendment in part to make its program and plan consistent with SMCRA 
    and in part at its own initiative to make its program consistent with 
    the Utah Administrative Procedures Act, thereby improving operational 
    efficiency.
        The Utah program provisions of the Utah Coal Mining and Reclamation 
    Act of 1979 that Utah proposed to revise were: Utah Code Annotated 
    (UCA) 40-10-2, purpose of Chapter 10; (2) UCA 40-10-3, definitions of 
    new terms ``adjudicative proceeding,'' ``lands eligible for remining,'' 
    and ``unanticipated event or condition;'' (3) UCA 40-10-6.5, rulemaking 
    authority and procedure; (4) UCA 40-10-6.7, administrative procedures; 
    (5) UCA 40-10-7, prohibition of financial interest in any coal mining 
    operation; (6) UCA 40-10-8, coal exploration rules issued by the 
    Division and penalty for violation; (7) UCA 40-10-10, permit 
    applications; (8) UCA 40-10-11, Division action on the permit 
    application; (9) UCA 40-10-12, revision or modification of permit 
    provisions; (10) UCA 40-10-13, informal conferences; (11) UCA 40-10-14, 
    permit approval or disapproval, appeals, and further review; (12) UCA 
    40-10-15, performance bonds; (13) UCA 40-10-16, release of performance 
    bond, surety, or deposit; (14) UCA 40-10-17, revegetation standards on 
    lands eligible for remining; (15) UCA 40-10-18, operator requirements 
    for underground coal mining; (16) UCA 40-10-19, information provided by 
    the permittee to the Division and right of entry; (17) UCA 40-10-20, 
    contest of violation or amount of penalty; (18) UCA 40-10-21, civil 
    action to compel compliance with Utah's program and other rights not 
    affected; (19) UCA 40-10-22, violations of Utah's program or permit 
    conditions; (20) UCA 40-10-24, determination of unsuitability of lands 
    for surface coal mining; and (21) UCA 40-10-30, judicial review of 
    rules or orders. Utah also proposed to repeal UCA 40-10-4, ``Mined land 
    reclamation provisions applied,'' and UCA 40-10-31, ``Chapter's 
    procedures supersede Title 63, Chapter 46b.'' Finally, Utah proposed to 
    repeal UCA 40-10-11(5), modification of permit issuance prohibition, 
    and UCA 40-10-17(2)(t)(ii), revegetation standards on lands eligible 
    for remining, effective September 30, 2004.
        The Utah plan provisions of the Utah Coal Mining and Reclamation 
    Act of 1979 that Utah proposed to revise were: (1) UCA 40-10-25, lands 
    and water eligible for reclamation; (2) UCA 40-10-27, entry upon land 
    adversely affected by past coal mining practices, State acquisition of 
    land and public sale, and water pollution control and treatment plants; 
    and (3) UCA 40-10-28, recovery of reclamation costs and liens against 
    reclaimed land.
        OSM announced receipt of the proposed amendment in the May 12, 
    1994, Federal Register (59 FR 24675), provided an opportunity for a 
    public hearing or meeting on its substantive adequacy, and invited 
    public comment on its adequacy (administrative record No. UT-926). 
    Because no one requested a public hearing or meeting, none was held. 
    The public comment period ended on June 13, 1994.
        During its review of the amendment, OSM identified concerns 
    relating to the provisions of the Utah Coal Mining and Reclamation Act 
    of 1979 at UCA 40-10-3(1), definition of ``adjudicative proceeding;'' 
    UCA 40-10-4, applicability of provisions of UCA 40-8; UCA 40-10-6.7 and 
    Utah Administrative Rule (Utah Admin. R.) 641-100-100, administrative 
    procedures; UCA 40-10-11(3) schedule of applicant's mining law 
    violations; UCA 40-10-11(5), remining operation violations resulting 
    from unanticipated events or conditions; UCA 40-1013(2)(b), location of 
    informal conferences; UCA 40-1014(6)(c), appeal to district court and 
    further review; UCA 40-10-16(6), information conference or formal 
    hearings concerning performance bond release decisions; UCA 40-10-
    18(4), damage resulting from underground coal mining subsidence; UCA 
    40-10-20(2)(e), contest of a violation or amount of a civil penalty; 
    UCA 40-10-22(2)(b), cessation order, abatement notice or show cause 
    order; UCA 40-10-22(3)(e), costs assessed against the permittee or any 
    person having an interest that is or may be adversely affected by the 
    notice or order of the Board of Oil, Gas and Mining (Board); and UCA 
    40-10-28 (1)(b) and (2)(b), recovery of reclamation costs and liens 
    against reclaimed land. OSM notified Utah of the concerns by letter 
    dated October 24, 1994 (administrative record No. UT-980).
        Utah responded in a letter dated December 7, 1994, by submitting a 
    revised amendment and additional explanatory information 
    (administrative record No. UT-997). Utah proposed revisions to its 
    Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Board at Utah Admin. R. 641-100-
    100, administrative procedures. Utah also proposed revisions to and 
    additional explanatory information for UCA 40-10-14(6), appeal to 
    district court and further review, UCA 40-10-4, mined land reclamation 
    provisions applied, UCA 40-10-16(6), formal hearings or informal 
    conferences, and UCA 40-10-22(2)(b), cessation orders, abatement 
    notices, or show cause orders.
        Based upon the revisions to and additional explanatory information 
    for the proposed program and plan amendment submitted by Utah, OSM 
    reopened the public comment period in the December 15, 1994, Federal 
    Register (59 FR 64636, administrative record No. UT-1002). The public 
    comment period ended on December 30, 1994.
    
    III. Director's Findings
    
        As discussed below, the Director, in accordance with SMCRA and 30 
    CFR 732.15 and 732.17, finds, with additional requirements, that the 
    proposed program and plan amendment submitted by Utah on April 14, 
    1994, and as revised by it and supplemented with additional explanatory 
    information on December 7, 1994, is no less effective than the 
    corresponding Federal regulations and no less stringent than SMCRA. 
    Accordingly, the Director approves the proposed amendment.
    
    [[Page 37004]]
    
    
    1. Nonsubstantive Revisions to Utah's Statutes
    
        Utah proposed revisions to the following previously-approved 
    statutes that are nonsubstantive in nature and consist of minor 
    editorial, punctuation, grammatical, and recodification changes 
    (corresponding SMCRA provisions are listed in parentheses):
    
        UCA 40-10-2 (1) through (6), purpose (section 102 of SMCRA),
        UCA 40-10-3 (2) through (7), (9) through (20), and (22), 
    recodification of definitions for the terms ``alluvial valley 
    floors,'' ``approximate original contour,'' ``Board,'' ``Division,'' 
    ``imminent danger to the health and safety of the public,'' 
    ``employee,'' ``operator,'' ``other minerals,'' ``permit,'' ``permit 
    applicant,'' or ``applicant,'' ``permitting agency,'' ``permit 
    area,'' ``permittee,'' ``person,'' ``prime farmland,'' ``reclamation 
    plan,'' ``surface coal mining and reclamation operations,'' 
    ``surface coal mining operations,'' and ``unwarranted failure to 
    comply'' (sections 701 (1), (2), (8), (13) through (21), (28), (29), 
    and (33) of SMCRA),
        UCA 40-10-6.5 (2) and (3) [recodification], rulemaking 
    procedures (section 505 of SMCRA),
        UCA 40-10-7(1), prohibited financial interest in mining 
    operations (section 201(f) of SMCRA),
        UCA 40-10-8 (1) and (3), exploration rules issued by Division 
    and penalty for violation (section 512 of SMCRA),
        UCA 40-10-10(2), submission of application and reclamation plan 
    (section 507 of SMCRA),
        UCA 40-10-11 (1), (2) (a) through (d), (e)(ii), (f) (i) and 
    (iii); and (4) (a) and (b), Division action on permit application, 
    requirements for approval, and restoration of prime farmland 
    (section 510 of SMCRA),
        UCA 40-10-12(3), revision or modification of permit provisions 
    (section 511(c) of SMCRA),
        UCA 40-10-14 (2) and (3), notice to the applicant of approval or 
    disapproval of the application and hearings (section 514 of SMCRA),
        UCA 40-10-15(1), performance bonds (section 509(a) of SMCRA),
        UCA 40-10-16(1), (3), and (6)(a), release of performance bond, 
    surety, or deposit; action on application for relief of bond; and 
    formal hearings or informal conferences (section 519 of SMCRA),
        UCA 40-10-17(2)(g); (2)(j) (i)(B) and (ii) (A) and (B); (2)(m); 
    (2)(o) and (o) (i), (iv), and (v); (2)(p) (i)(F), (ii), and (iii); 
    (2)(t)(i); (2)(v)(viii); (3)(b) and (b)(ii); (3)(c); (4) (a) and 
    (d); and (5), performance standards for all coal mining and 
    reclamation operations, additional standards for steep-slope surface 
    coal mining, and variances (section 515 of SMCRA),
        UCA 40-10-18(1), (2)(i)(i)(B), (2)(j), and (5), underground coal 
    mining, rules regarding surface effects, operator requirements for 
    underground coal mining, and applicability of other chapter 
    provisions (section 516 of SMCRA),
        UCA 40-10-19(1) and (2)(a), information provided by the 
    permittee to the Division and inspections by the Division (sections 
    (517(b) and (b)(3) of SMCRA),
        UCA 40-10-21(1)(a)(i) and (ii), (2)(a)(ii), and (5), civil 
    action to compel compliance with chapter, jurisdiction, and other 
    rights not affected (section 520 of SMCRA),
        UCA 40-10-22 (1)(c) and (2)(a)(i), violation of chapter or 
    permit conditions and inspections (section 521 of SMCRA),
        UCA 40-10-24(1)(c) (i) (A), (B), (C), and (D), and (ii); (e) 
    (i), (ii), and (iii); and (2) (a) and (b), determination of 
    unsuitability of lands for surface coal mining, petitions, and 
    public hearings (section 522 of SMCRA),
        UCA 40-10-25(2) (d) and (e) [recodification] and (3) and (3)(a), 
    AMLR program, expenditure priorities, and eligible lands and water 
    (sections 402(g)(4), 403, and 404 of SMCRA), and
        UCA 40-10-27 (5)(a) and (12)(b), entry upon land adversely 
    affected by past coal mining practices and State acquisition of 
    lands (sections 407(g) and 413 of SMCRA).
    
        Because the proposed revisions to these previously-approved 
    statutes are nonsubstantive in nature, the Director finds that these 
    proposed Utah statutes are no less stringent than SMCRA. The Director 
    approves these proposed statutes.
    
    2. Substantive Revisions to Utah's Statutes That Are Substantively 
    Identical to the Corresponding Provision of SMCRA
    
        Utah proposed revisions to the following statutes that are 
    substantive in nature and contain language that is substantively 
    identical to the requirements of the corresponding SMCRA provisions 
    (listed in parentheses).
    
        UCA 40-10-3 (8) and (21), definitions for the terms ``lands 
    eligible for remining'' and ``unanticipated event or condition'' 
    (sections 701 (33) and (34) of SMCRA),
        UCA 40-10-11(5) (b), and (c), Division action on permit 
    application and requirements for approval (section 510(e) of SMCRA),
        UCA 40-10-17(2)(t)(ii), performance standards for lands eligible 
    for remining (section 515(b)(20)(B) of SMCRA),
        UCA 40-10-22(1) (d), and (3) (a), (b), (d), and (f), violations 
    of chapter or permit conditions; cessation orders, abatement 
    notices, or show cause orders; suspension or revocation of permits; 
    and reviews (sections 521(a)(4) and 525 (a)(1) and (a)(2) and (d) of 
    SMCRA), and
        UCA 40-10-25(2)(d) [deletion], 3(b), (4), (5), and (6), AMLR 
    program and eligible lands and water (section 402(g)(4) of SMCRA).
    
        Because these proposed Utah statutes are substantively identical to 
    the corresponding provisions of SMCRA, the Director finds that they are 
    no less stringent than SMCRA. The Director approves these proposed 
    statute provisions.
    
    3. UCA 40-10-3(1), Definition of ``Adjudicative Proceeding''
    
        Utah proposed at UCA 40-10-3(1) a definition for the term 
    ``adjudicative proceeding'' to mean ``a division or board action or 
    proceeding that determines the legal rights, duties, privileges, 
    immunities, or other legal interests of one or more identifiable 
    persons, including all actions to grant, deny, revoke, suspend, modify, 
    annul, withdraw, or amend an authority, right, permit, or license.'' 
    This definition is similar to the definitions of the same term at 
    existing UCA 63-46b-2(1)(a) as described at UCA 63-46b-1 of the Utah 
    Administrative Procedures Act (UAPA) and Utah Admin. R. 641-100-200 of 
    the Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Board, except that the 
    proposed definition at UCA 40-10-3(1) does not contain the phrase ``and 
    judicial review of all such actions.''
        The term ``adjudicative proceeding'' is not specifically defined in 
    the provisions of SMCRA or the Federal regulations at 30 CFR Chapter 
    VII. Although there is no counterpart definition of ``adjudicative 
    proceeding'' in SMCRA or the implementing Federal regulations, section 
    526(e) of SMCRA provides, in part, that ``[a]ction of the State 
    regulatory authority pursuant to an approved State program shall be 
    subject to judicial review by a court of competent jurisdiction in 
    accordance with State law * * *.''
        UCA 40-10-30, which is Utah's counterpart to 526(e) of SMCRA, 
    establishes requirements for judicial review of any ``rule or order of 
    the Board.'' However, the proposed definition at UCA 40-10-3(1) of 
    ``adjudicative proceeding'' does not reference the judicial review 
    provision at UCA 40-10-30(1), and by not specifically providing for 
    ``judicial review of all such actions'' in the proposed definition, the 
    implication is that judicial review is not included in ``adjudicative 
    proceedings.'' The inconsistency between definitions of the same term 
    within provisions of the Utah regulatory program and the lack of 
    consistency between the provisions of UCA 40-10-3(1) and 40-10-30 were 
    pointed out to Utah by OSM in its October 24, 1994, issue letter (issue 
    No. 1). In order to be consistent with its own provisions at UCA 40-10-
    30(1), which do require judicial review of adjudicative proceedings, 
    and with its other existing definitions of ``adjudicative proceedings'' 
    at UCA 63-46b-2(1)(a), which is further clarified at UCA 63-46b-1, and 
    Utah Admin. R. 641-100-200, Utah, in its December 7, 1994, response to 
    OSM's issue letter, 
    
    [[Page 37005]]
    stated that it would pursue the inclusion of judicial review in its 
    definition of ``adjudicative proceeding'' at UCA 40-10-3(1) during its 
    1996 legislative session.
        Therefore, the Director finds that Utah's proposed definition of 
    ``adjudicative proceeding'' at UCA 40-10-3(1), while not inconsistent 
    with the provisions of SMCRA because there is no Federal counterpart 
    definition for this term, is inconsistent with the definition of the 
    same term elsewhere at UCA 63-46b-2(1)(a), as clarified at UCA 63-46b-
    1, of the UAPA, and the implementing rules at Utah Admin. R. 641-100-
    200. With the requirement that Utah further revise its definition of 
    ``adjudicative proceeding'' at UCA 40-10-3(1) to include judicial 
    review of agency actions, the Director is approving Utah's proposed 
    definition of ``adjudicative proceeding'' at UCA 40-10-3(1).
    
    4. Repeal of UCA 40-10-4, Applicability of Provisions of UCA 40-8
    
        Utah proposed to repeal its provisions at UCA 40-10-4, which 
    concern the applicability of provisions of Title 40, Chapter 8 and its 
    implementing rules at Utah Admin. R. Part 647 to the State's coal 
    mining and reclamation operations. UCA 40-8 and Utah Admin. R. Part 647 
    pertain to the Utah Mined Land Reclamation Act and contain general 
    reclamation standards for mining, principally for hard rock mining. 
    There are no Federal SMCRA to either UCA 40-10-4 or 40-8.
        The repeal of UCA 40-10-4 would appear to eliminate any 
    applicability of the provisions of UCA 40-8 and Utah Admin. R. Part 647 
    to the Utah program. OSM notes, however, that UCA 40-10-6, which is not 
    proposed for revision in this amendment, also references UCA 40-8. The 
    language at UCA 40-10-6 provides that the Board and Division have 
    powers, functions, and duties in addition to those provided in Title 
    40, Chapter 8, and that employees, agents, and contractors are 
    authorized by the Board and Division to enter upon any property for the 
    purpose of carrying out the provisions of Chapter 10 and Chapter 8, 
    Title 40.
        OSM, in its October 24, 1994, issue letter (issue No. 2), asked 
    Utah to clarify whether the Board and Division derived some or all of 
    their powers, functions, or duties necessary for the administration of 
    Utah's coal program from provisions contained in UCA 40-8. Utah stated 
    in its December 7, 1994, response to this issue that UCA 40-10-4 was 
    proposed for deletion from the Utah Coal Mining and Reclamation Act in 
    order to remove ambiguity from Utah's statute to clarify which, if any, 
    of the UCA 40-8 provisions would apply to the State's coal regulatory 
    program. Utah clarified further that the reference to UCA 40-8 at UCA 
    40-10-6 stems from the legislative branch awarding more powers in 1979 
    to the Board and Division and that such reference is only for 
    historical purposes. Utah also stated that should there be provisions 
    of UCA 40-8 or 40-6 which are discovered to apply to coal or which, 
    when changed, would impact Utah's coal regulatory program, these 
    provisions would be included in a program amendment.
        Based upon the explanation provided by Utah and the State's 
    assurance that the Board and Division do not derive powers needed to 
    implement Utah's coal regulatory program from UCA 40-8, the Director 
    finds that the deletion of the UCA 40-10-4 from the Coal Mining and 
    Reclamation Act of 1979 is not inconsistent with SMCRA and approves the 
    deletion of this statutory provision.
    
    5. UCA 40-10-6.5 (1) and (3), Rulemaking Authority and Deletion of 
    Administrative Procedures
    
        Utah proposed the addition of new language at UCA 40-10-6.5(1) to 
    provide that ``[t]he board shall promulgate rules under this chapter in 
    accordance with Title 63, Chapter 46a, Utah Administrative Rulemaking 
    Act [UARA].'' OSM, in the January 21, 1981, Federal Register (46 FR 
    5899), approved UARA provisions that were incorporated by Utah into its 
    program as part of its original program submittal.
        Section 503(a)(7) of SMCRA provides, in part, that ``[e]ach state * 
    * * shall submit to the Secretary, * * * a State program which 
    demonstrates that such State has the capability of carrying out the 
    provisions of this Act and meeting its purposes through * * * rules and 
    regulations consistent with regulations issued by the Secretary 
    pursuant to this Act.''
        The Director finds that the proposed addition at UCA 40-10-6.5(1) 
    is not inconsistent with section 503(a)(7) of SMCRA and the Director 
    approves the proposed addition of this statute.
        In addition, Utah proposed to delete UCA 40-10-6.5(3) in its 
    entirety. Existing UCA 40-10-6.5(3) provides that:
    
    [h]earings under this chapter shall be conducted in a manner which 
    guarantees the parties' due process rights. This includes, but is 
    not limited to, the right to examine any evidence presented to the 
    [hearing] committee, the right to cross-examine any witness, and a 
    prohibition of ex parte communication between any party and a member 
    of the board.
    
        Utah proposed at UCA 40-10-6.7(2)(b) the addition of similar 
    provisions to those proposed for deletion (see finding No. 6). The 
    Director finds that, with the proposed addition of similar language at 
    UCA 40-10-6.7(2)(b), the deletion of UCA 40-10-6.5(3) is not 
    inconsistent with SMCRA. The Director approves the deletion of this 
    statute.
    
    6. UCA 40-10-6.7 and Utah Admin. R. 641-100-100, Administrative 
    Procedures
    
        Utah proposed new administrative procedures at UCA 40-10-6.7 to 
    provide:
    
        (1)(a) Informal adjudicative proceedings shall be conducted by 
    the division under this chapter and shall be referred to as 
    conferences or informal conferences.
        (b) The conduct of conferences shall be governed by rules 
    adopted by the board which are in accordance with Title 63, Chapter 
    46b, Administrative Procedures Act [UAPA].
        (2)(a)(i) Formal adjudicative proceedings shall be conducted by 
    the division or board under this chapter and shall be referred to as 
    hearings or public hearings.
        (ii) The conduct of hearings shall be governed by rules adopted 
    by the board which are in accordance with Title 63, Chapter 46b, 
    Administrative Procedures Act [UAPA].
        (b) Hearings under this chapter shall be conducted in a manner 
    which guarantees the parties' due process rights. This includes:
        (i) the right to examine any evidence presented to the board;
        (ii) the right to cross-examine any witness; and
        (iii) a prohibition of ex parte communication between any party 
    and a member of the board.
        (c) A verbatim record of each public hearing required by this 
    chapter shall be made, and a transcript made available on the motion 
    of any party or by order of the board.
    
        Although not explicitly stated in this provision, the Utah Admin. 
    R. Parts 645 and 641 rules respectively apply to informal and formal 
    adjudicative proceedings and provide clear direction on how formal and 
    informal hearings are to be conducted. There are no specific 
    counterpart provisions in SMCRA, however, as discussed in finding No. 5 
    above, Utah's proposed deletion of UCA 40-10-6.5(3) in its entirety and 
    the addition of the deleted provisions at UCA 40-10-6.7(2)(b) and 
    (b)(i), (ii), and (iii) provides hearing requirements that are not 
    inconsistent with SMCRA and its implementing Federal regulations.
        Utah, in this amendment, also proposed a revision to its Rules of 
    Practice and Procedure of the Board at Utah Admin. R. 641-100-100 to 
    add the phrase ``the Coal Program Rules'' in the 
    
    [[Page 37006]]
    sentence ``[t]he rules for informal adjudicative proceedings are in the 
    Coal Program Rules, the Oil and Gas Conservation Rules and the Mineral 
    Rules.'' OSM previously approved the informal proceeding provisions of 
    Utah Admin. R. 645 and formal proceeding provisions of Utah Admin. R. 
    641.
        The Director finds that the addition of new administrative 
    procedures at UCA 40-10-6.7 is not inconsistent with SMCRA. OSM wishes 
    to clarify that any future rules implemented by Utah in accordance with 
    UAPA must be revised and determined to be consistent with SMCRA. In 
    addition, the Director finds that the proposed revision at Utah Admin. 
    R. 641-100-100 referencing Utah's coal mining rules at Utah Admin. R. 
    Part 645 is not inconsistent with SMCRA. Therefore, the Director 
    approves the addition of UCA 40-10-6.7 and the revision of Utah Admin. 
    R. 641-100-100.
    
    7. UCA 40-10-11(3), Schedule of Applicant's Mining Law Violations and 
    Pattern of Violations Determination
    
        Utah proposed to revise UCA 40-10-11(3) to provide, in part:
    
    [t]he applicant shall file with his permit application a schedule 
    listing any and all notices of violations of this chapter, any state 
    or federal program or law approved under the Surface Mining Control 
    and Reclamation Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C. Sec. 1201 et seq., and any 
    law, rule, or regulation of the United States, State of Utah, or any 
    department or agency in the United States pertaining to air or water 
    environmental protection incurred by the applicant in connection 
    with any surface coal mining operation during the three-year period 
    prior to the date of application. * * * no permit shall be issued to 
    an applicant after a finding by the board * * * that the applicant, 
    or the operator specified in the application, controls or has 
    controlled mining operations with a demonstrated pattern of willful 
    violations of this chapter of such nature and duration with such 
    resulting irreparable damage to the environment as to indicate an 
    intent not to comply with the provisions of this chapter.
    
        Emphasis added. As used by Utah in UCA 40-10-11(3), ``this 
    chapter'' means UCA Title 40, Chapter 10.
        Section 510(c) of SMCRA provides, in part, that (1) the applicant 
    shall file with the permit application a schedule listing any and all 
    notices of violations of, among other things, ``this Act;'' and (2) the 
    permit shall not be issued after a finding that the applicant, or the 
    operator specified in the application, controls or has controlled 
    mining operations with a demonstrated pattern of willful violations of 
    ``this Act'' of such nature and duration with such resulting 
    irreparable damage to the environment as to indicate an intent not to 
    comply with the provisions of ``this Act.'' The reference to ``this 
    Act'' in section 510(c) of SMCRA includes SMCRA, the implementing 
    Federal regulations, and all State and Federal programs approved under 
    SMCRA. (See 48 FR 44344, 44389, September 28, 1983. See also 53 FR 
    38868, 38882-38883, October 3, 1988.)
        With regard to the first sentence of UCA 40-10-11(3) that requires 
    that the permit application contain a schedule listing any and all 
    notices of violations, the provision encompasses violations of all 
    State and Federal programs approved under SMCRA, but it does not 
    encompass violations of SMCRA itself or violations of the implementing 
    Federal regulations. With regard to the portion of UCA 40-10-11(3) that 
    deals with the pattern of violations, ``this chapter'' encompasses only 
    violations of the State statute. It does not encompass violations of 
    SMCRA, the implementing Federal regulations, any State and Federal 
    programs enacted under SMCRA, or other provisions of the approved Utah 
    program.
        OSM discussed these issues in its October 24, 1994, issue letter to 
    Utah (issue No. 4). Utah agreed in its December 7, 1994, response to 
    OSM's issue letter that UCA 40-10-11(3) needed to be revised in 
    accordance with the deficiencies identified in OSM's issue letter. Utah 
    stated that it would, in its 1996 legislative session, pursue the 
    changes to UCA 40-10-11(3).
        Based upon the above, the Director, with the requirement that Utah 
    revise UCA 40-10-11(3) to require that (1) the schedule of the 
    applicant's mining law violations required in connection with a permit 
    application includes violations of SMCRA and the implementing Federal 
    regulations and (2) the pattern of violations determination discussed 
    therein includes violations of SMCRA, the implementing Federal 
    regulations, any State or Federal programs enacted under SMCRA, and 
    other provisions of the approved Utah program, finds UCA 40-10-11(3) to 
    be no less stringent than section 510(c) of SMCRA. The Director 
    approves the proposed revisions at UCA 40-10-11(3).
    
    8. UCA 40-10-11(5)(a), Remining Operation Violations Resulting From 
    Unanticipated Events or Conditions
    
        Proposed UCA 40-10-11(5)(a) provides that the prohibition of UCA 
    40-10-11(3), which limits the issuance of a permit for violations 
    (discussed above at finding No. 7), does not apply to a permit 
    application after October 14, 1992, if the violation resulted from an 
    unanticipated event or condition that occurred at a surface coal mining 
    operation on lands eligible for remining under a permit held by the 
    person making the application. This provision is similar to section 
    510(e) of SMCRA, except that section 510(e) of SMCRA applies after the 
    date of enactment of the Energy Policy Act of 1992, which was October 
    24, 1992. OSM discussed the difference in dates in its October 24, 
    1994, issue letter to Utah (issue No. 4). Utah stated in its December 
    7, 1994, response to OSM's issue letter that the October 14 date at UCA 
    40-10-11(5)(a) is a typographical error and that the correct date 
    should be October 24.
        With the requirement that Utah revise UCA 40-10-11(5)(a) to reflect 
    an effective date of ``after October 24, 1992,'' the Director finds UCA 
    40-10-11(5)(a) to be no less stringent than section 510(e) of SMCRA. 
    The Director approves proposed UCA 40-10-11(5)(a).
    
    9. UCA 40-10-13(2)(b), Location of Informal Conferences
    
        Existing UCA 40-10-13(2)(b) states that, if a person files written 
    objections on an initially-proposed or revised mine permit application, 
    the Division shall hold an informal conference within a reasonable time 
    of the receipt of the objections or request. Utah proposed to revise 
    this rule to further state, among other things, that:
    
    [t]he conference shall be informal and shall be conducted in 
    accordance with the procedures described in Subsection (b), 
    irrespective of the requirements of Section [UCA] 63-46b-5, 
    Administrative Procedures Act. The conference may be held in the 
    locality of the coal mining and reclamation operation if requested 
    within a reasonable time after written objections or the request for 
    an informal conference are received by the division.
    
        Emphasis added. The procedures described in subsection (b) of UCA 
    40-10-13(2) are consistent with the procedures for informal conferences 
    established by section 513(b) of SMCRA, except that SMCRA requires that 
    the regulatory authority shall hold an informal conference in the 
    locality of the proposed mining, if requested within a reasonable time 
    of the receipt of such written objections or the request.
        Because Utah did not submit any rationale for this statute, it is 
    not clear what it intended with the use of the word ``may'' instead of 
    ``shall.'' It is possible that Utah intended, as section 513(b) of 
    SMCRA requires, that the Division would always hold an informal 
    conference in the locality of the proposed mining when requested within 
    a reasonable time after receipt of the objections or request. However, 
    the use of the word ``may'' in the proposed 
    
    [[Page 37007]]
    statute would appear to allow Utah discretion to not hold the informal 
    conference in the locality of the proposed mining even when the 
    Division receives a request to do so within a reasonable time. The 
    Director finds that UCA 40-10-13(2)(b), to the extent that the first 
    sentence of the proposed new language at this statute requires that the 
    conference be informal and be conducted in accordance with the 
    procedures for informal conferences, is no less stringent than section 
    513(b) of SMCRA, and approves this part of the statute. However, to the 
    extent that the second sentence Utah proposed to add at UCA 40-10-
    13(2)(b) allows the Division to possibly not hold the informal 
    conference in the locality of the coal mining and reclamation operation 
    when such conference is requested within a reasonable time, the 
    Director finds UCA 40-10-13(2)(b) is less stringent than section 513(b) 
    of SMCRA. Utah stated in its December 7, 1994, response to OSM's 
    October 24, 1994, issue letter (issue No. 6), that it would pursue a 
    change from the discretionary ``may'' in holding the informal 
    conference in the locality of the mining operation to a mandatory 
    ``shall'' in its 1995 legislative session.
        Therefore, with the requirement that Utah revise UCA 40-10-13(2)(b) 
    to change the word ``may'' to ``shall'' in the sentence that begins 
    ``[t]he conference may be held in the locality of the coal mining and 
    reclamation operation * * *,'' the Director finds UCA 40-10-13(2)(b) to 
    be no less stringent than section 513(b) of SMCRA. The Director 
    approves the proposed revisions at UCA 40-10-13(2)(b).
    
    10. UCA 40-10-14(6), Appeal to District Court and Further Review
    
        In response to the required amendment at 30 CFR 944.16(b) 
    (September 27, 1994; 59 FR 49185, 49186; finding No. 3), which required 
    Utah to alleviate a discrepancy in the requirements addressing the 
    jurisdiction of the Utah Supreme Court and the State district courts, 
    and at its own initiative, Utah proposed to revise UCA 40-10-14(6). 
    Specifically, Utah proposed that:
    
        (a) [a]n applicant or person with an interest which is or may be 
    adversely affected who has participated in the proceedings [to 
    determine whether a permit should be issued] as an objector, and who 
    is aggrieved by the decision of the board, may appeal the decision 
    of the board directly to the Utah Supreme Court.
        (b) [i]f the board fails to act within the time limits specified 
    in this chapter [UCA Title 40, Chapter 10], the applicant or any 
    person with an interest which is or may be adversely affected, who 
    has requested a hearing in accordance with Subsection (3), may bring 
    an action in the district court for the county in which the proposed 
    operation is located.
        (c) [a]ny party to the action in district court may appeal from 
    the final judgment, order, or decree of the district court.
        (d) [t]ime frames for appeals under Subsections (6) (a) through 
    (c) shall be consistent with applicable provisions in Section 63-46-
    14, Administrative Procedures Act.
    
        (Italics indicate new language proposed to be added to this 
    statute.) Utah also proposed the deletion of the provision at UCA 40-
    10-14(6)(b) that required that ``[r]eview of the adjudication of the 
    district court is by the [Utah] Supreme Court.''
        Section 526(e) of SMCRA provides, in pertinent part, that actions 
    of the State regulatory authority pursuant to an approved State program 
    are subject to judicial review by a court of competent jurisdiction in 
    accordance with State law.
        The Director finds that Utah's proposed procedures for further 
    review and appeal of decisions concerning permit applications at UCA 
    40-10-14(6) are consistent with and no less stringent than the judicial 
    review requirements of section 526(e) of SMCRA. Therefore, the Director 
    approves proposed UCA 40-10-14(6). The Director also notes that the 
    proposed revisions at UCA 40-10-14(6) satisfy the required amendment at 
    30 CFR 944.16(b) (59 FR 49185, 49186; September 27, 1994; finding No. 
    3), which required Utah to amend this statute to eliminate 
    inconsistencies regarding appellate procedures. Accordingly, the 
    Director is removing the required amendment at 30 CFR 9434.16(b).
    
    11. UCA 40-10-16(6) (b) through (d), Informal Conferences or Formal 
    Hearings Pertaining to Performance Bond Release Decisions
    
        Utah proposed to delete its procedural requirements pertaining to 
    bond release decisions at UCA 40-10-16(6) (b) through (d) and to 
    replace them with a reference in UCA 40-10-16(6)(d) to the Board's 
    Rules of Practice and Procedure, which are at Utah Admin. R. Part 641. 
    Existing UCA 40-10-16(6) is substantively identical to the provisions 
    of sections 519 (f), (g), and (h) of SMCRA, which provides, in 
    pertinent part, the requirements for advertising notice of a hearing, 
    establishing an informal conference to resolve written objections, 
    gathering evidence, and compiling a verbatim record and making a 
    transcript available.
        The procedural requirements at sections 519 (f), (g), and (h) of 
    SMCRA are contained in the referenced Rules of Practice and Procedure 
    of the Board at Utah Admin. R. Part 641. In addition, Utah has 
    clarified, that for the purposes of UCA 40-10-16(6), all of the 
    provisions of Utah Admin. R. Part 641 apply to hearings held for the 
    purpose of bond release.
        There is no counterpart provision in SMCRA similar to Utah's 
    provision at UCA 40-10-16(6)(c) that allows an informal conference to 
    be converted to a formal proceeding under the standards set forth at 
    UCA 63-46b-4 of UAPA. OSM requested in its October 24, 1994, issue 
    letter (issue No. 8) that Utah verify that all procedural requirements 
    accompanying a formal hearing will occur prior to continuing the 
    conference as a formal proceeding when an informal conference is 
    converted to a formal proceeding under UCA 63-46b-4. Utah responded in 
    its December 7, 1994, letter that when a hearing is converted to a 
    formal proceeding from an informal proceeding, all of the requirements 
    of a formal proceeding apply.
        Based upon Utah's assurances that the provisions of Utah Admin. R. 
    Part 641, Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Board, provide for 
    counterpart requirements to sections 519 (f), (g), and (h) of SMCRA, 
    apply to bond release hearings, and that, when an informal hearing is 
    converted to a formal hearing, the requirements of a formal proceeding 
    apply, the Director finds that the revisions proposed by Utah at UCA 
    40-10-16(6) are no less stringent than sections 519 (f), (g), and (h) 
    of SMCRA. The Director approves the revised statute.
    
    12. UCA 40-10-18(4) (a) through (c), Damage Resulting From Underground 
    Coal Mining Subsidence
    
        Utah proposed new language at UCA 40-10-18(4) (a) through (c) to 
    provide:
    
        (a) [u]nderground coal mining operations conducted after October 
    24, 1994, shall be subject to the following requirement: The 
    permittee shall promptly repair, or compensate for, material damage 
    resulting from subsidence caused to any occupied residential 
    dwelling and related structures of noncommercial building due to 
    underground coal mining operations. Repair of damage will include 
    rehabilitation, restoration, or replacement of the damaged occupied 
    residential dwelling and related structures of noncommercial 
    building. Compensation shall be provided to the owner of the damaged 
    occupied residential dwelling and related structures or 
    noncommercial building and will be in the full amount of the 
    diminution in value resulting from the subsidence. Compensation may 
    be accomplished by the purchase, prior to mining, of a 
    noncancellable premium prepaid insurance policy.
    
    [[Page 37008]]
    
        (b) [n]othing in Subsection (4) shall be construed to prohibit 
    or interrupt underground coal mining operations.
        (c) [w]ithin one year after the date of enactment of Subsection 
    (4), the board shall adopt final rules to implement Subsection (4).
    
        The proposed language at UCA 40-10-18(4)(a) is substantively 
    identical to the language provided at section 720(a)(1) of SMCRA, which 
    requires repair or compensation for material damage to certain 
    structures resulting from subsidence due to underground coal mining. 
    Therefore, the Director finds that UCA 40-10-18(4)(a) is no less 
    stringent than SMCRA and approves the statute.
        The proposed language at UCA 40-10-18(4)(b) is identical to the 
    last sentence of section 720(a)(2) of SMCRA, which provides that 
    ``[n]othing in this section shall be construed to prohibit or interrupt 
    underground coal mining operations.'' This proposed language is 
    consistent with section 720(a)(2) of SMCRA and the Director approves 
    it. However, UCA 40-10-18(4)(b) lacks a counterpart provision to the 
    first sentence of section 720(a)(2), which requires the prompt 
    replacement of any drinking, domestic, or residential water supply from 
    a well or spring in existence prior to the application for a surface 
    coal mining and reclamation permit, which has been affected by 
    contamination, diminution, or interruption resulting from underground 
    coal mining operations. As stated in the March 31, 1995, Federal 
    Register final rule (60 FR 16722, 16745), if the Director determines 
    that certain State program provisions should be amended in order to be 
    made no less effective that the revised Federal rules, the individual 
    States will be notified in accordance with the provisions of 30 CFR 
    732.17. For Utah, this may mean that a 30 CFR part 732 issue letter may 
    be written if a determination is made that Utah's program is less 
    effective than the Federal rules concerning the protection of water 
    supplies affected by underground coal mining operations.
        The proposed language at UCA 40-10-18(4)(c) is Utah's counterpart 
    provisions to section 720(b) of SMCRA, which requires the promulgation, 
    after providing notice and an opportunity for public comment, of final 
    regulations to implement the subsidence provisions of section 720 of 
    SMCRA. The Director finds that UCA 40-10-18(4)(c) is no less stringent 
    than section 720(b) of SMCRA and approves it.
    
    13. UCA 40-10-20(2)(e)(ii), Contest of Violation or Amount of Civil 
    Penalty
    
        In response to the Director's previous finding that UCA 40-10-20(3) 
    was less stringent than section 518(c) of SMCRA, and the Director's 
    deferred decision on this statutory provision (September 27, 1994; 59 
    FR 49185, 49187; finding No. 5), Utah proposed to create UCA 40-10-
    20(2)(e)(ii) to require that, if the operator charged with a violation 
    fails to forward the amount of the penalty to the Division within 30 
    days of receipt of the results of an informal conference, the operator 
    waives any opportunity ``for further review of the violation or to 
    contest the violation.''
        Section 518(c) of SMCRA provides, in part, that failure of the 
    operator to forward the amount of the penalty to the Secretary of the 
    Interior within 30 days shall result in a waiver of all legal rights to 
    contest the violation or the amount of the penalty. Utah's proposed 
    phrase ``for further review of the violation or to contest the 
    violation'' addresses an operator's waiver of the right to contest the 
    fact of the violation, but does not address an operator's waiver of the 
    right to contest the amount of the civil penalty.
        The Director finds UCA 40-10-22(2)(e)(ii) to be less stringent than 
    section 518(c) of SMCRA to the extent that it does not preclude an 
    operator from contesting the amount of the penalty when the operator 
    does not forward the amount of the civil penalty to the Division within 
    30 days of the operator's receipt of the results of the informal 
    conference. Utah stated in its December 7, 1994, response to OSM's 
    October 24, 1994, issue letter (issue No. 10) that it would pursue 
    clarification in its 1996 legislative session of what is waived when an 
    operator fails to forward the amount of the penalty to the Division.
        Therefore, with the requirement that Utah revise UCA 40-10-
    20(2)(e)(ii) to provide for a waiver of the operator's right to contest 
    the amount of the civil penalty when the operator fails to forward the 
    amount of the penalty to the regulatory authority within 30 days of 
    receipt of the results of the informal conference, the Director finds 
    UCA 40-10-20(2)(e)(ii) to be no less stringent than section 518(c) of 
    SMCRA. The Director approves the proposed statute.
    
    14. UCA 40-10-22(2)(b), Cessation Orders, Abatement Notices, and Show 
    Cause Orders
    
        Utah proposed at UCA 40-10-22(2)(b), among other things, that any 
    relief granted by a State district court to enforce an order pursuant 
    to UCA 40-10-22(2)(a)(i) shall continue in effect until the completion 
    or final termination of all proceedings for review of such order, 
    unless prior to completion or termination, the Utah Supreme Court on 
    review grants a stay of enforcement or sets aside or modifies the 
    Board's order that is being appealed.
        Section 521(c) of SMCRA provides that, under similar circumstances, 
    any relief granted by the Federal district court shall continue in 
    effect until completion or final termination of all proceedings for 
    review of such order, unless prior thereto, the district court granting 
    such relief sets it aside or modifies it. Section 521(d) of SMCRA 
    requires that an approved State program contain the same or similar 
    procedural requirements relating to the enforcement provisions of 
    section 521 of SMCRA.
        OSM requested in its October 24, 1994, issue letter that Utah 
    clarify whether the provisions of UCA 40-10-22(2)(b) allow the State 
    district court to set aside or modify its own relief as section 521(d) 
    of SMCRA does (issue No. 11). Utah stated in its December 7, 1994, 
    response to OSM's issue letter that State law provides for the Utah 
    Supreme Court to be the authority for modifying or setting aside a 
    Board order or decision, and that, to the extent that any judicial body 
    can reconsider its own order or decision, the State district court can 
    also modify or set aside its own order or decision.
        Based upon Utah's explanation of its rationale for the proposed 
    revisions at UCA 40-10-22(2)(b), the Director finds that this provision 
    is consistent with the provisions of section 521(c) of SMCRA. The 
    Director approves the proposed revisions to UCA 40-10-22(2)(b).
    15. UCA 40-10-22(3)(e), Costs Assessed Against Either Party Adversely 
    Affected by the Board's Notice or Order
    
        Utah proposed to revise UCA 40-10-22(3)(e) to provide:
    
        [w]henever an order is entered under this section or as a result 
    of any adjudicative proceeding under this chapter, at the request of 
    any person, a sum equal to the aggregate amount of all costs and 
    expenses (including attorney fees) as determined by the board to 
    have been reasonably incurred by that person in connection with his 
    participation in the proceedings, including any judicial review of 
    agency actions, may be assessed against either party as the court, 
    resulting from judicial review, or the board, resulting from 
    adjudicative proceedings, deems proper.
    
        UCA 40-10-22(3)(e) is similar to section 525(e) of SMCRA, except 
    Utah is proposing to change the term ``administrative proceedings'' to 
    ``adjudicative proceedings.'' This 
    
    [[Page 37009]]
    change is consistent with the addition of a definition for the term 
    ``adjudicative proceeding'' proposed by Utah in this amendment at UCA 
    40-10-3(1). As discussed in finding No. 3, the definition of 
    ``adjudicative proceeding'' as proposed by Utah at UCA 40-10-3(1) does 
    not encompass judicial review.
        Use of the term ``adjudicative proceeding'' in UCA 40-10-22(3)(e) 
    allows Utah to limit the reimbursement of costs and expenses incurred 
    through participation in the proceedings to only proceedings which are 
    adjudicatory in nature. Section 525(e) of SMCRA provides for the award 
    of costs and expenses incurred in connection with ``any administrative 
    proceeding.'' Prior to Utah's adoption of the amendment under 
    consideration in this rulemaking, UCA 40-10-22(3)(e) contained similar 
    language.
        Both the Interior Board of Land Appeals (IBLA) and the U.S. 
    District Court for the Utah District declined to delineate the full 
    reach of the phrase ``any administrative proceeding'' in section 525(e) 
    of SMCRA when presented with an opportunity to do so. Natural Resources 
    Defense Council, Inc. (NRDC), et al. v. Office of Surface Mining 
    Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM) et al., 107 IBLA 339, 365 n. 12 
    (1989); Utah International, Inc. v. Department of the Interior, 643 F. 
    Supp. 819, 825 n. 25 (D. Utah 1986). However, in deciding these cases, 
    both IBLA and the U.S. District Court held that this phrase should not 
    be read literally, but rather must be interpreted in the context of the 
    legislative history of SMCRA and case law concerning attorney fee and 
    expense awards under other statutes. Both opinions contain extensive 
    dicta suggesting that the phrase could or should be read to include 
    only administrative proceedings of an adjudicatory nature, not 
    proceedings that are part of the fact-finding process culminating in an 
    initial agency decision, e.g., informal conferences on permit 
    applications. NRDC, supra, at 354-360; Utah International, supra, at 
    820-825.
        Furthermore, the Federal regulations at 43 CFR 4.1290 and 4.1291, 
    which implement this section of SMCRA in part, provide for an award of 
    costs and expenses only in connection with administrative proceedings 
    resulting in the issuance of a final order by an administrative law 
    judge or IBLA. The preamble to these regulations notes that the 
    Secretary rejected comments requesting the scope of the rules be 
    expanded to allow the award of costs and expenses in other types of 
    administrative proceedings, such as rulemaking (4 CFR 34385, August 3, 
    1978).
        Therefore, the Director finds the Utah statutory provision at UCA 
    40-10-22(3)(e) that allows for award of costs and expenses in 
    connection with an adjudicatory proceeding is not inconsistent with 
    section 525(e) of SMCRA and its implementing regulations, as 
    interpreted by case law. The Director approves the proposed revisions 
    to this sttatute.
        The Director's approval is based upon OSM's interpretation that the 
    term ``adjudicatory proceedings,'' as used at UCA 40-10-22(3)(e) 
    includes all classes of actions in which participants would be eligible 
    for an award of costs and expenses under 43 CFR 4.1290 through 4.1295. 
    The Director notes that, as more case law develops, it may be necessary 
    in the future to further expand the provisions at UCA 40-10-22(3)(e) to 
    include other types of administrative proceedings. In that event, OSM 
    would notify Utah in accordance with 30 CFR Part 732.
    
    16. UCA 40-10-28 (1)(a)(ii) and (2)(a), Recovery of Reclamation Costs 
    and Liens Against Reclaimed Lands
    
        In response to the Director's previous finding that UCA 40-10-
    28(1)(a)(ii) and 40-10-28(2)(a) were not consistent with sections 
    407(e) and 408(a) of SMCRA and the Director's deferred decision on 
    these statutory provisions (September 27, 1994; 59 FR 49185, 49187-88; 
    finding Nos. 7 and 9), Utah proposed to add new language to its 
    provisions at UCA 40-10-28(1)(a)(ii) and UCA 40-10-28(2)(a).
        Utah proposed at UCA 40-10-28(1)(a)(ii) to require that the sale 
    price of land that is sold to the State or local government for public 
    purposes may not be less than the actual ``cost of the purchase of the 
    property by the State plus the'' costs of reclaiming the land. This 
    requirement is analogous to and no less stringent than the counterpart 
    Federal provision at section 407(e) of SMCRA, which provides that the 
    sale price of land sold to the State or local government for public 
    purposes may in no case be less than the cost of purchase and 
    reclamation of such land.
        Utah also proposed the addition of a new provision at UCA 40-10-
    28(2)(a) to provide, in addition to other criteria, that a lien will be 
    placed against reclaimed land except where the surface owner ``owned 
    the land prior to May 2, 1977.'' This specific requirement is analogous 
    to and no less stringent than the requirement of section 408(a) of 
    SMCRA, which provides, in part, that no lien shall be filed against the 
    property of any person who owned the land prior to May 2, 1977.
        As discussed above, the revisions proposed by Utah in this 
    amendment at UCA 40-10-28(1)(a)(ii) and 40-10-28(2)(a) are consistent 
    with sections 407(e) and 408(a) of SMCRA. Therefore, the Director 
    approves the proposed revisions to these statutes.
    
    17. UCA 40-10-30, Judicial Review of Orders or Rules
    
        Utah proposed new provisions at UCA 40-10-30 to provide, in part:
    
        (1) [j]udicial review of adjudicative proceedings under this 
    chapter is governed by Title 63, Chapter 46b, Administrative 
    Procedures Act, and provisions of this chapter consistent with the 
    Administrative Procedures Act.
        (2) [j]udicial review of the board's rulemaking procedures and 
    rules adopted under this chapter is governed by Title 63, Chapter 
    46a, Utah Administrative Rulemaking Act.
        (3) [a]n appeal from an order of the board shall be directly to 
    the Utah Supreme Court and is not a trial de novo. * * *
        (4) [a]n action or appeal involving an order of the board shall 
    be determined as expeditiously as feasible and in accordance with 
    Subsection 78-2-2(3)(e)(iv). The Utah Supreme Court shall determine 
    the issues on both questions of law and fact and shall affirm or set 
    aside the rule or order, enjoin or stay the effective date of agency 
    action, or remand the cause to the board for further proceedings. * 
    * *
        (5) [i]f the board fails to perform any act or duty under this 
    chapter which is not discretionary, the aggrieved person may bring 
    an action in the district court of the county in which the operation 
    or proposed operation is located.
    
    (Italics indicate new language proposed to be added to this statute.) 
    Utah also proposed to delete the requirement at existing UCA 40-10-
    30(3) that ``[r]eview of the adjudication of the district court is by 
    the Supreme Court.''
        The proposed revisions at UCA 40-10-30 are consistent with the 
    requirements of the counterpart Federal provisions of section 526 of 
    SMCRA. Therefore, the Director finds that the proposed revisions at UCA 
    40-10-30 are no less stringent than section 526 of SMCRA and approves 
    them.
    
    IV. Summary and Disposition of Comments
    
        Following are summaries of all substantive oral and written 
    comments on the proposed amendment that were received by OSM, and OSM's 
    response to them.
    
    1. Public Comments
    
        OSM invited public comments on the proposed amendment, but none 
    were received.
    
    [[Page 37010]]
    
    
    2. Federal Agency Comments
        Pursuant to 732.17(h)(11)(i), OSM solicited comments on the 
    proposed amendment from various Federal agencies with an actual or 
    potential interest in the Utah program and Utah AMLR plan.
        In a telephone conversation on May 11, 1994, the Bureau of Mines 
    stated that it had no comments on the proposed amendment 
    (administrative record No. UT-922).
        The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers responded in a letter dated May 
    23, 1994, that it found the proposed changes to be satisfactory 
    (administrative record No. UT-930).
        In a letter dated May 18, 1995, the Mine Safety and Health 
    Administration stated that its personnel had reviewed the proposed 
    amendment for possible conflicts with MSHA regulations and that no 
    conflicts between the two were found (administrative record No. UT-
    1056).
    
    3. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Concurrence and Comments
    
        Pursuant to 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(ii), OSM is required to solicit 
    the written concurrence of EPA with respect to those provisions of the 
    proposed program amendment that relate to air or water quality 
    standards promulgated under the authority of the Clean Water Act (33 
    U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) or the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.). 
    None of the revisions that Utah proposed to make in its amendment 
    pertain to air or water quality standards. Therefore, OSM did not 
    request EPA's concurrence.
        Pursuant to 732.17(h)(11)(i), OSM solicited comments on the 
    proposed amendment from EPA (administrative record No. UT-919). It 
    responded on May 9, 1994, that it believed that the proposed amendment 
    would have no impact on water quality standards promulgated under the 
    authority of the Clean Water Act, as amended (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.).
    
    4. State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO)
    
        Pursuant to 30 CFR 732.17(h)(4), OSM solicited comments on the 
    proposed amendment from the SHPO (administrative record Nos. UT-919). 
    The SHPO did not respond to OSM's request.
    
    V. Director's Decision
    
        Based on the above findings, the Director approves, with additional 
    requirements, Utah's proposed amendment as submitted on April 14, 1994, 
    and as revised and supplemented with additional explanatory information 
    on December 7, 1994.
        The Director approves the following sections of the proposed 
    amendment, as discussed in: finding No. 1, UCA 40-10-2 (1) through (6), 
    concerning purpose; UCA 40-10-3 (2) through (7), (9) through (20), and 
    (22) [recodification], concerning the definitions of certain terms; UCA 
    40-10-6.5 (2) and (3) [recodification], concerning rulemaking 
    procedures; UCA 40-10-7(1), concerning prohibited financial interest in 
    mining operations; UCA 40-10-8 (1) and (3), concerning exploration 
    rules issued by the Division and penalties for violations; UCA 40-10-
    10(2), concerning submission of the application and reclamation plan; 
    UCA 40-10-11 (1), (2)(a) through (d), (e)(ii), (f) (i) and (iii), and 
    (4) (a) and (b), concerning Division action on the permit application, 
    requirements for approval, and restoration of prime farmland; UCA 40-
    10-12(3), concerning revision or modification of permit provisions; UCA 
    40-10-14 (2) and (3), concerning notice to the applicant of approval or 
    disapproval of the application and hearings; UCA 40-10-15(1), 
    concerning performance bonds; UCA 40-10-16 (1), (3), and (6)(a), 
    concerning release of the performance bond, surety, or deposit, action 
    on the application for relief of bond, and formal hearings or informal 
    conferences; UCA 40-10-17 (2)(g), (2)(j) (i)(B) and (ii) (A) and (B), 
    (2)(m), (2) (o) and (o)(i), (iv), and (v), (2)(p)(i)(F), (ii), and 
    (iii), (2)(t)(i), (2)(v)(viii), (3)(b) and (b)(ii), (3)(c), (4) (a) and 
    (d), and (5), concerning performance standards for all coal mining and 
    reclamation operations, additional standards for steep-slope surface 
    coal mining, and variances; UCA 40-10-18 (1), (2)(i)(i)(B), (2)(j), and 
    (5), concerning underground coal mining, rules regarding surface 
    effects, operator requirements for underground coal mining, and 
    applicability of other chapter provisions; UCA 40-10-19 (1) and (2)(a), 
    concerning information provided by the permittee to the Division and 
    inspections by the Division; UCA 40-10-21(1)(a) (i) and (ii), and 
    (2)(a)(ii), and (5), concerning civil action to compel compliance with 
    chapter, jurisdiction, and other rights not affected; UCA 40-10-22 
    (1)(c) and (2)(a)(i), concerning violation of chapter or permit 
    conditions and inspections; UCA 40-10-24(1)(c)(i) (A), (B), (C), and 
    (D), and (ii), (e) (i), (ii), and (iii), and (2) (a) and (b), 
    concerning determination of unsuitability of lands for surface coal 
    mining, petitions, and public hearings; UCA 40-10-25(2) (d) and (e) 
    [recodification] and (3) and (3)(a), concerning abandoned mine 
    reclamation program, expenditure priorities, and eligible lands and 
    water; and UCA 40-10-27(5)(a) and (12)(b), concerning entry upon land 
    adversely affected by past coal mining practices and State acquisition 
    of lands; finding No. 2, UCA 40-10-3 (8) and (21), concerning 
    definitions for the terms ``lands eligible for remining'' and 
    ``unanticipated event or condition;'' UCA 40-10-11(5) (b), and (c), 
    concerning Division action on permit application and requirements for 
    approval; UCA 40-10-17(2)(t)(ii), concerning performance standards for 
    lands eligible for remining; UCA 40-10-22 (1)(d) and (3) (a), (b), (d) 
    and (f), concerning violations of chapter or permit conditions, 
    cessation orders, abatement notices, or show cause orders, suspension 
    or revocation of permits, and reviews,; and UCA 40-10-25(2)(d) 
    [deletion], 3(b), (4), (5), and (6), concerning abandoned mine 
    reclamation program, eligible lands and water; finding No. 4, UCA 40-
    10-4, concerning repeal of the applicability of provisions of UCA 40-8; 
    finding No. 5, UCA 40-10-6.5 (1) and (3), concerning rulemaking 
    authority and deletion of administrative procedures; finding No. 6, UCA 
    UCA 40-10-6.7 and Utah Admin. R. 641-100-100, concerning administrative 
    procedures; finding No. 10, UCA 40-10-14(6), concerning appeal to 
    district court and further review; finding No. 11, UCA 40-10-16(6) (b) 
    through (d), concerning informal conferences or formal hearings 
    pertaining to performance bond release decisions; finding No. 12, UCA 
    40-10-18(4), concerning damage resulting from underground coal mining 
    subsidence; finding No. 15, UCA 40-10-22(2)(b), concerning cessation 
    orders, abatement notices, and show cause orders; finding No. 15, UCA 
    40-10-22(3)(e), concerning costs assessed against either party 
    adversely affected by the Board's notice or order; finding No. 16, UCA 
    40-10-28(1)(a)(ii) and (2)(a), concerning recovery of reclamation costs 
    and liens against reclaimed lands; and finding No. 17, UCA 40-10-30, 
    concerning judicial review of rules or orders.
        With the requirement that Utah further revise its statutes, the 
    Director approves, as discussed in: finding No. 3, UCA 40-10-3(1), 
    concerning the definition of ``adjudicative proceeding;'' finding No. 
    7, UCA 40-10-11(3), concerning the schedule of an applicant's mining 
    law violations and pattern of violations determination; finding No. 8, 
    UCA 40-10-11(5)(a), concerning remining operation violations resulting 
    from unanticipated events or conditions; finding No. 9, UCA 40-10-
    13(2)(b), concerning the 
    
    [[Page 37011]]
    location of informal conferences; and finding No. 13, UCA 40-10-
    20(2)(e)(ii), concerning contest of the violation or the amount of the 
    civil penalty.
        The Director approves the statutes and rule as proposed by Utah 
    with the provision that they be fully promulgated in identical form to 
    the statutes and rule submitted to and reviewed by OSM and the public.
        The Federal regulations at 30 CFR Part 944, codifying decisions 
    concerning the Utah program and Utah plan, are being amended to 
    implement this decision. This final rule is being made effective 
    immediately to expedite the State program and plan amendment process 
    and to encourage States to bring their programs into conformity with 
    the Federal standards without undue delay. Consistency of State and 
    Federal standards is required by SMCRA.
    
    VI. Procedural Determinations
    
    1. Executive Order 12866
    
        This rule is exempted from review by the Office of Management and 
    Budget (OMB) under Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and 
    Review).
    
    2. Executive Order 12778
    
        The Department of the Interior has conducted the reviews required 
    by section 2 of Executive Order 12778 (Civil Justice Reform) and has 
    determined that this rule meets the applicable standards of subsections 
    (a) and (b) of that section. However, these standards are not 
    applicable to the actual language of State regulatory programs and 
    program amendments or AMLR plans and revisions thereof since each such 
    program or plan is drafted and promulgated by a specific State, not by 
    OSM. Under sections 503 and 505 of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1253 and 1255) and 
    the Federal regulations at 30 CFR 730.11, 732.15, and 732.17(h)(10), 
    decisions on proposed State regulatory programs and program amendments 
    submitted by the States must be based solely on a determination of 
    whether the submittal is consistent with SMCRA and its implementing 
    Federal regulations and whether the other requirements of 30 CFR Parts 
    730, 731, and 732 have been met. Decisions on proposed State AMLR plans 
    and revisions thereof submitted by a State are based on a determination 
    of whether the submittal meets the requirements of Title IV of SMCRA 
    (30 U.S.C. 1231-1243) and the applicable Federal regulations at 30 CFR 
    Parts 884 and 888.
    
    3. National Environmental Policy Act
    
        No environmental impact statement is required for this rule since 
    section 702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1292(d)) provides that agency 
    decisions on proposed State regulatory program provisions do not 
    constitute major Federal actions within the meaning of section 
    102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 
    4332(2)(C)).
        No environmental impact statement is required for this rule since 
    agency decisions on proposed State AMLR plans and revisions thereof are 
    categorically excluded from compliance with the National Environmental 
    Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332) by the Manual of the Department of the 
    Interior (516 DM 6, appendix 8, paragraph 8.4B(29)).
    4. Paperwork Reduction Act
    
        This rule does not contain information collection requirements that 
    require approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 
    3507 et seq.).
    
    5. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    
        The Department of the Interior has determined that this rule will 
    not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
    entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). 
    The State submittal that is the subject of this rule is based upon 
    counterpart Federal regulations for which an economic analysis was 
    prepared and certification made that such regulations would not have a 
    significant economic effect upon a substantial number of small 
    entities. Accordingly, this rule will ensure that existing requirements 
    established by SMCRA or previously promulgated by OSM will be 
    implemented by the State. In making the determination as to whether 
    this rule would have a significant economic impact, the Department 
    relied upon the data and assumptions for the counterpart Federal 
    regulations.
    
    List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 944
    
        Intergovernmental relations, Surface mining, Underground mining.
    
        Dated: July 13, 1995.
    Richard J. Seibel,
    Regional Director, Western Regional Coordinating Center.
    
        For the reasons set out in the preamble, Title 30, Chapter VII, 
    Subchapter T of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as set forth 
    below:
    
    PART 944--UTAH
    
        1. The authority citation for Part 944 continues to read as 
    follows:
    
        Authority: 30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.
    
        2. Section 944.15 is amended by adding paragraph (ff) to read as 
    follows;
    
    
    Sec. 944.15  Approval of amendments to State regulatory program.
    
    * * * * *
        (ff) The revisions to or additions of the following sections of the 
    Utah Code Annotated 1953 (UCA), Title 40, and the Utah Administrative 
    Rules (Utah Admin. R.) for Coal Mining, as submitted to OSM on April 
    14, 1994, and as revised and supplemented with explanatory information 
    on December 7, 1994, are approved effective July 19, 1995.
    
    UCA 40-10-2 (1) through (6)........  Purpose.                           
    40-10-3(1).........................  Definition of ``Adjudicative       
                                          Proceeding.''                     
    40-10-3 (2) through (7), (9)         Recodification of Definitions.     
     through (20), and (22).                                                
    40-10-3 (8) and (21)...............  Definitions of ``Lands Eligible for
                                          Remining'' and ``Unanticipated    
                                          Event or Condition.''             
    40-10-4............................  Repeal of the Applicability        
                                          Provisions of 40-8.               
    40-10-6.5(1).......................  Rulemaking Authority.              
    40-10-6.5 (2) and (3)..............  Recodification of Rulemaking       
                                          Procedures.                       
    40-10-6.5(3).......................  Deletion of Administrative         
                                          Procedures.                       
    40-10-6.7..........................  Administrative Procedures.         
    40-10-7(1).........................  Prohibited Financial Interests in  
                                          Mining Operations.                
    40-10-8 (1) and (3)................  Exploration Rules Issued by        
                                          Division and Penalty for          
                                          Violations.                       
    40-10-10(2)........................  Submission of Applications and     
                                          Reclamation Plans.                
    40-10-11 (1), (2)(a) through (d),    Division of Oil, Gas and Mining    
     (e)(ii), (f) (i) and (iii), and      (Division) Action on Permit       
     (4) (a) and (b).                     Applications, Requirements for    
                                          Approval, and Restoration of Prime
                                          Farmland.                         
    40-10-11(3)........................  Schedule of Applicant's Mining Law 
                                          Violations and Pattern of         
                                          Violations Determination.         
    
    [[Page 37012]]
                                                                            
    40-10-11(5)(a).....................  Remining Operation Violations      
                                          Resulting From Unanticipated      
                                          Events or Conditions.             
    40-10-(5) (b) and (c)..............  Division Action on Permit          
                                          Applications and Requirements for 
                                          Approval.                         
    40-10-12(3)........................  Revisions or Modifications of      
                                          Permit Provisions.                
    40-10-13(2)(b).....................  Location of Informal Conferences.  
    40-10-14 (2) and (3)...............  Notice to Applicant of Approval or 
                                          Disapproval of Application and    
                                          Hearings.                         
    40-10-14(6)........................  Appeals to District Court and      
                                          Further Review.                   
    40-10-15(1)........................  Performance Bonds.                 
    40-10-16 (1), (3), and (6)(a)......  Release of the Performance Bond,   
                                          Surety, or Deposit, Action on     
                                          Application for Relief of Bond,   
                                          and Formal Hearings or Informal   
                                          Conferences.                      
    40-10-16(6) (b) through (d)........  Information Conferences or Formal  
                                          Hearings Pertaining to Performance
                                          Bond Release Decisions.           
    40-10-17(2) (g), (2)(j)(i) (B) and   Performance Standards for All Coal 
     (ii)(A) and (B), (2)(m), (2) (o),    Mining and Reclamation Operations,
     and (o)(i), (iv), and (v), (2)(p)    Additional Standards for Steep-   
     (i)(F), (ii), and (iii),             Slope Surface Coal Mining, and    
     (2)(t)(i), (2) (v)(viii), (3) (b)    Variances.                        
     and (b)(ii), (3)(c), (4) (a) and                                       
     (d), and (5).                                                          
    40-10-17(2)(t)(ii).................  Performance Standards for All Coal 
                                          Mining and Reclamation Operations.
    40-10-18 (1), (2)(i)(i)(B), (2)(j),  Underground Coal Mining, Rules     
     and (5).                             Regarding Surface Effects,        
                                          Operator Requirements for         
                                          Underground Coal Mining, and      
                                          Applicability of Other Chapter    
                                          Provisions.                       
    40-10-18(4) (a) through (c)........  Damage Resulting From Underground  
                                          Coal Mining Subsidence.           
    40-10-19 (1) and (2)(a)............  Information Provided by Permittee  
                                          to Division and Inspections by    
                                          Division.                         
    40-10-20(2)(e)(ii).................  Contest of the Violation or the    
                                          Amount of the Civil Penalty.      
    40-10-21 (1)(a) (i) and (ii),        Civil Action to Compel Compliance  
     (2)(a)(ii), and (5).                 with Chapter, Jurisdiction, and   
                                          Other Rights Not Affected.        
    40-10-22 (1)(c) and (2)(a)(i)......  Violations of Chapter or Permit    
                                          Conditions and Inspections.       
    40-10-22 (1)(d) and (3) (a), (b),    Violations of Chapter or Permit    
     (d), and (f).                        Conditions, Cessation Orders,     
                                          Abatement Notices, or Show Cause  
                                          Orders, and Suspensions or        
                                          Revocations of Permit.            
    40-10-22(2)(b).....................  Cessation Orders, Abatement        
                                          Notices, and Show Cause Orders.   
    40-10-22(3)(e).....................  Costs Assessed Against Either      
                                          Party.                            
    40-10-24(1)(c)(i) (A), (B), (C),     Determination of Unsuitability of  
     and (D), and (ii), (e) (i), (ii),    Lands for Surface Coal Mining,    
     and (iii), and (2) (a) and (b).      Petitions, and Public Hearings.   
    40-10-30...........................  Judicial Review of Rules or Orders.
    Utah Admin. R. 641-100-100.........  Administrative Procedures.         
                                                                            
    
    
        3. Section 944.16 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph 
    (b) and adding paragraphs (e) through (i) to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 944.16   Required program amendments.
    
    * * * * *
        (e) By March 1, 1996, Utah shall revise its definition of 
    ``adjudicative proceeding'' at UCA 40-10-3(1) to include judicial 
    review of agency actions.
        (f) By March 1, 1996, Utah shall revise UCA 40-10-11(3) to require 
    that (1) the schedule of the applicant's mining law violations required 
    in connection with a permit application includes violations of SMCRA 
    and the implementing Federal regulations and (2) the pattern of 
    violations determination discussed therein includes violations of 
    SMCRA, the implementing Federal regulations, any State or Federal 
    programs enacted under SMCRA, and other provisions of the approved Utah 
    program.
        (g) By March 1, 1996, Utah shall revise UCA 40-10-11(5)(a) to 
    reflect an effective date of ``after October 24, 1992.''
        (h) By March 1, 1996, Utah shall revise UCA 40-10-13(2)(b) to 
    change the word ``may'' to ``shall'' in the sentence that begins 
    ``[t]he conference may be held in the locality of the coal mining and 
    reclamation operation * * *.''
        (i) By March 1, 1996, Utah shall revise UCA 40-10-20(2)(e)(ii) to 
    provide for a waiver of the operator's right to contest the amount of 
    the civil penalty when the operator fails to forward the amount of the 
    penalty to the regulatory authority within 30 days of receipt of the 
    results of the informal conference.
    
        4. Section 944.25 is amended by adding paragraph (c) to read as 
    follows:
    
    
    Sec. 944.25   Approval of amendments to State abandoned mine plan.
    
    * * * * *
        (c) The following sections of the Utah Code Annotated 1953 (UCA), 
    Title 40, pertaining to the Utah abandoned mine plan, as submitted to 
    OSM on April 14, 1994, and revised on December 7, 1994, are approved 
    effective July 19, 1995.
    
    40-10-25(2)(d), Deletion of Research and Demonstration Projects.
    40-10-25(2) (d) and (e), Recodification of Expenditure Priorities.
    40-10-25 (3), (3)(a), (3)(b), (4), (5), and (6), Eligible Lands and 
    Water.
    40-10-27 (5)(a) and (12)(b), Entry Upon Land Adversely Affected by Past 
    Coal Mining Practices and State Acquisition of Lands.
    40-10-28 (1)(a)(ii) and (2)(a), Recovery of Reclamation Costs and Liens 
    Against Reclaimed Lands.
    
    [FR Doc. 95-17716 Filed 7-18-95; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 4310-05-M
    
    

Document Information

Published:
07/19/1995
Department:
Interior Department
Entry Type:
Rule
Action:
Final rule; approval of amendment.
Document Number:
95-17716
Dates:
July 19, 1995.
Pages:
37002-37012 (11 pages)
PDF File:
95-17716.pdf
CFR: (3)
30 CFR 944.15
30 CFR 944.16
30 CFR 944.25